You may notice a couple of problems (on top of the last paragraph that basically provides a loophole):
It creates an "internal" path to whistleblow - in other words, you're protected by this EO if you decide to whistleblow what you deem NSA abuse to the NSA and their supervisors.
This has been tried before this EO and we see the result of that (check Binney, Drake, Loomis, Weibe).
The only thing this EO adds would be that Binney, Loomis and Weibe would be allowed to get back to work.. But the problem wasn NOT that they wanted to get back to work and couldn't. It was that they though the Gov did something illegal and wanted to report it to the American people - which this EO does not protect.
Drake (2011 recipient of the Ridenhour Prize for Truth-Telling and co-recipient of the Sam Adams Associates for Integrity in Intelligence) award and someone like Ellsberg (Right Livelihood Award) would not be covered by this EO.
“Were talking about spies and national security... And as I said there is an EO protecting them if they go to their superiors...
I guess it would be ok with you if we just broadcast where our spies are and what they're doing...”
Noodle Head on Jun 3, 2014 at 21:39:50
“I'm going to reply to you by taking you at your word that you're an open minded person and this is how you see things... not a fanboy where it's a waste of time to provide any arguments and facts..
Okay, so to answer your thing going through the system. It doesn't work and it's been proven not to have worked.
Binney, Weibe, Loomis & Drake are just a few examples of going through the system and not only being ignored, but actually being burned for daring to bring up the issues. Matter of fact, if you watch the Frontline: State of Secrets doc you will see the supervisors responsible for this actually say (on film) something like "Yeah, if they came to me I probably would not have listened to them" - I kid you not.
Ed certainly saw all this happening, but even he tried to go through the system. In the beginning the Gov said they have no record of him having tried to go to a superior if he felt something is wrong. Now, they found at least one email from him.
But beyond that, there is the moral factor... as MLK said "Never forget that everything Hitler did in Germany was legal."
If national security of a so called "democratic country" involves spying on your law abiding citizens indiscriminately then you might want to question whether such 'national security' is actual a security for the people or the state. Gestapo did National Security too.”
“Yes, that's correct... Just like cops aren't supposed to take the drugs from criminals and sell them...”
Noodle Head on Jun 2, 2014 at 23:15:23
“Except that the analogy would sound more like this:
Cops can't report that other crooked cops take drugs from criminals and sell them.
That's because the problem here wasn't doing something illegal, it was reporting something illegal.
"Yes, that's correct" - Why not move to North Korea then.”
“Is that an executive order...? If you want to give interviews DON'T BE A SPY...”
Noodle Head on May 31, 2014 at 18:31:26
“Really, so if you're a spy you basically sign your life away to the devil. You could be carrying out genocide at the request of your government but you could never go to a reporter and say something as simple as "While I can't talk about it, I think what we're doing is extremely wrong"?
You cannot even talk about unclassified information. You think that's okay in a democratic open country? How would that even BE a democratic and transparent country with such rules?
You think it should all be hidden away and it would basically come down to taking Clapper's word for it?
You do know that historically speaking this is how police states operate, right?
“Promoting the general welfare in this case means collecting metadata to keep EXPLOSIONS out of America...
And ANYONE who acts like they didn't know this is LYING...”
Christopher Nagy on May 30, 2014 at 15:57:31
“You might want to brush up on the definition of the word "know."
And, good lord, that is the first time I've seen anyone invoke general welfare as a justification. Not even the NSA has invoked general welfare; probably because it is a ridiculous statement. You do remember that the NSA is charged with keeping an eye on foreign elements, right? That whole FISA court? Yeah, FISA stands for Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. Going domestic was not part of the NSA's purview.
But I get where you're coming from: metadata has helped prevent numerous terrorist plots, right? No. Actually, it hasn't acted to prevent anything. The list of 50+ plots that the NSA said the program was vital in helping to stop turned out to be an exaggeration of about 50+. President Obama's administration looked into the list and they found maybe one incident that you could sort of claim that it might have helped with, if you squint hard enough at the report.”
“So now he shouldn't care about national security...? It was signed before Snowden...”
Noodle Head on May 30, 2014 at 14:51:30
“Classified information was always illegal to talk about.. this gag was not necessary for that. Let me use an analogy to make you understand:
Suppose you work for Boeing. You already have a contract that you cannot divulge any information on the planes they make and the technology used etc... That's already in place with harsh punishments.
But then Boeing institutes a gag order whereby you cannot go to the press and say ANYTHING. Things like "they work us too much"... or "I think it's unethical what they're doing"... or even "I've been discriminated at work". In other words, they get a free pass to do the most unethical stuff and it's all good because you can't talk about it.
Hope this makes it clear.
Fun fact: The NSA has a program of internal propaganda of how to discuss and promote the NSA at work and among your family (look it up).”
“SPIES ARE NOT SUPPOSED TO TELL YOU WHAT THEY KNOW... That's why they are spies...”
Christopher Nagy on May 29, 2014 at 18:36:36
“You could put a little effort into being coherent. As for spies; the oath to uphold and defend the Constitution takes precedence over any other oath, agreement, or pledge Snowden may have made the US government.”
“No, Obama signed an Executive Order protecting intelligence community workers who wanted to talk about what they thought was "bad..."
In 2010 or 2011... I believe it was because of Manning..”
Noodle Head on May 29, 2014 at 18:37:39
“Have you even done the research? If you would have done it you would have seen that I was wrong.
That's right... I was wrong. He prosecuted more whistleblowers than the past administrations (plural), all of them, combined. And I don't mean signed that gag order, which was actually signed quite recently.
google this: Charting Obama’s Crackdown on National Security Leaks”